SCHADENFREUDE

Sunday, May 4th, 2014 | Uncategorized

Long-time readers of whatever it is that I do around here know that there are two men about whom I avoid writing if I can possibly help it.  Both of them would quite literally knock down your 2-year-old niece or granddaughter if they saw a reporter and a camera so it would be more loving to provide your alcoholic brother with a free case of cheap bourbon every week than to provide these two with more publicity.

One of them, of course, is John Shelby Spong.  When I first started doing whatever it is that I do around here, I used to regularly get notes from people along the lines of, “Did you see what Spong just said?”  The fact was and remains to this day is that no one who pays attention ever has to see what Spong just said to know what Spong just said.

I never had to read Spong in order to know that whatever the megalomaniacal old fraud wrote was smug, titanically arrogant, supremely condescending, airily dismissive of any opinion other than his own, and had nothing whatsoever to do with the Christian religion as anyone has ever understood it.  John’s consistent, you have to give him that. 

As for the other guy who I don’t ever like to mention on this site if at all humanly possible?  Guess who’s getting a “divorce.”

Episcopal Organization?  Let’s review, shall we?  In 2003, you gave a pointy hat and a hooked stick to a homosexual and ripped the Anglican Communion apart.  That homosexual “bishop” subsequently got “married” and is now about to get “divorced.” 

A few years later, you made Barry Beisner an Episcopal “bishop,” a guy who’s been divorced twice and married three times (quite frankly, I think that Ol’ Third Time’s The Charm is a bigger scandal that Robbie ever was but that’s just me).

Let me bottom line it for you, Episcopal Organization.  Whenever the subject of marriage comes up in the future, you might want keep your smug, arrogant, condescending mouths shut.  Because you have nothing whatsoever to tell ANYONE about marriage and ANY Christian church’s theology of marriage is more Christian than yours can ever hope to be.

Thanks to dominic1955 for the heads-up.

62 Comments to SCHADENFREUDE

Fuinseoig
May 4, 2014

Okay, I was going to be charitable because this is Eastertide and it’s not really appropriate to gloat over public misfortunes.

And then I read this bit of the statement (article? post? I dunno what to call it) and all bets are off.

“(T)he challenge of becoming Christendom’s first openly gay priest to be elected a Bishop in the historic succession of bishops stretching back to the apostles.”

Don’t let any false modesty hold you back, Bishop Robinson; give us a genuine appraisal of your importance in the world!

If, by “openly gay”, he means “probably first minister of religion to tell the world and his wife at every possible opportunity that I’m gay”, then I’ll grant him that.

First gay bishop ever? In the entirety of the Church, whether Western, Eastern, or Oriental Orthodox? Going back all the way to the time of the Apostles?

I refer you to Benedict IX, 11th century pope (and yes, he’s not on the list of anti-popes, I checked) who, while he may not have published it in the papers, seems (if we can believe the sources, which may have been biased about him) to have been gay (amongst other things):

“St. Peter Damian is alleged to have described him as “feasting on immorality”; the anti-papal historian Ferdinand Gregorovius wrote that in Benedict, “It seemed as if a demon from hell, in the disguise of a priest, occupied the chair of Peter and profaned the sacred mysteries of religion by his insolent courses.” The Catholic Encyclopedia calls him “a disgrace to the Chair of Peter.” The first pope said to have been primarily homosexual, he was said to have held orgies in the Lateran palace.

He was also accused by Bishop Benno of Piacenza of “many vile adulteries and murders”. Pope Victor III, in his third book of Dialogues, referred to “his rapes, murders and other unspeakable acts. His life as a pope was so vile, so foul, so execrable, that I shudder to think of it.”

My dear Dante, in the “Inferno”, makes reference to a scandal of the day about the Archbishop of Florence (Andrea dei Mozzi) who at the request of his own brother was transferred by the pope to Vicenza instead, because of his ‘bestial’ life – traditionally this was held to refer to him being a sodomite, though some say it was rather a financial scandal.

100 Nonetheless, I go on speaking
101 with ser Brunetto, asking who, of his companions,
102 are most eminent, most worthy to be known.

And he: “Some of them it is good to know.
104 Others it is better not to mention,
105 for the time would be too short for so much talk.

106 ‘In sum, note that all of them were clerics
107 or great and famous scholars befouled
108 in the world above by a single sin.

109 ‘Priscian goes with that wretched crowd,
110 and Francesco d’Accorso too. And, had you had
a hankering for such filth, you might have seen

112 ‘the one transferred by the Servant of Servants
113 from the Arno to the Bacchiglione,
114 where he left his sin-stretched sinews.

So, although they might not have given interviews to all and sundry about it, certainly there were ‘openly gay’ clerics before Bishop Robinson.

Though granted, what he sees as a boast, others see as a disgrace.

Christopher Johnson
May 4, 2014

Thing is, F, that they’ll tell you that the folks back then didn’t know about or have any conception of “gay life-long, committed relationships” so your examples don’t apply. Except, as Robbie demonstrates, “gay life-long, commited relationships” apparently aren’t life-long or all that committed.

So I got nuthin’.

Fuinseoig
May 4, 2014

Oh, it’s not his divorce that has me steamed, Christopher; it’s his proud claim to be The Firstest Ever Gay Bishop Anywhere in the History of History.

First, that’s not true.

Second, I don’t necessarily see that as something to be proud of. I’m sure there were gay clergy who struggled with their sexuality and lived continent, chaste lives. I’m equally sure there were gay clergy who bonked anything with a pulse.

And I’m pretty darn sure that the locals knew full well if their bishop liked pretty boys.

So “First ever since the time of the Apostles to be out and proud” just rubbed me up the wrong way. Even when he’s trying to be humble about ordinary human failure, as in the breakdown of his second marriage, he can’t resist peacocking about “Lookit me, I’m so special!”

unreconstructed rebel
May 4, 2014

“The Firstest Ever Gay Bishop Anywhere in the History of History”

Is that copyrighted or otherwise protected? Just asking. :)

midwestnorwegian
May 4, 2014

And the dead faithful who gave their money to the Episcopal Church of yesteryear will pay for this pervert’s scumbag lawyers.

Katherine
May 4, 2014

I saw this early today and came right over to see if you had it, Chris! Next thing will be Gene claiming that prejudice against him strained his marriage and led to this second divorce.

Yeah, Fuinseoig, Gene is claiming he’s the first “homosexual” bishop. Remember those other guys, as it was in scriptural times, knew nothing about “faithful, monogamous” good homosexuals. Those popes you refer to weren’t like Gene! He’s a good guy!

Ed the Roman
May 4, 2014

So, looks like the marriages of gay bishops are 0 and 1.

Once again, if you’ll swallow Pike and Spong, why strain at Righter and Robinson?

Christopher Johnson
May 4, 2014

WAY more than a fair question, E the R.

Dale Matson
May 4, 2014

“The thing that astounds me about Jesus, as told in this Passion story, is that he keeps putting one foot in front of the other, praying that it’s in the right direction, but not knowing for sure.” Not the case for Jesus at all but definitely the case for Vickey Gene.

Kc
May 4, 2014

Perhaps he will create another divorce ceremony…being the center of the known universe and all……

dominic1955
May 4, 2014

You’re welcome. This is what I get for drinking a cappuccino too late in the day-I can’t sleep and then I get my mind raped by a megalomaniacal narcissist of a “bishop” who just has to publish his latest bit of attention whoredom FIRST THING SUNDAY MORNING.

Gee, commemorating the Lord’s resurrection or getting the world prepped for Vicki Gene’s Absolutely FAAAAAB-ulous Piskie Divorce CELEBRATION! VG was also the “first” (who actually knows, who actually cares…) bishop who publically had a “ceremony” or “ritual” of some sort in the Epo Organization to divorce his wife and come out of the closet. Now he can be the first to do the same thing to “divorce” his gay “husband”.

I’m sure the flowers are going to be just smashing! :D

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
May 4, 2014

Not that it makes it right but Pike & Spong were seen as anomalies at first. Of course Jim Pike was easy to dismiss when he ended it all before becoming the Perpetual Heresy Machine that Spong is. With Righter – and especially Robinson – the trajectory away from Christianity became fixed.

Robinson seems to live his life just so that he can create headlines and grab attention. ‘Oh dear me, I haven’t been in the news this week! Mark, I’ve been thinking…’

tjmcmahon
May 4, 2014

Where is the Saturday Night Live “Churchlady” when you need her?
“Well, isn’t this special….”

Now he has become the first bishop ever to have divorced someone of each gender.

Matthew A
May 4, 2014

Well if those two crazy lovebirds can not make a go of it, what hope is there for the rest of us?

Gregg the obscure
May 4, 2014

I’m about as anti-divorce as can be. I take seriously the phrase “what God has put together, let no man separate”. That being said, the latest development in the Vicki Robinson story is a good one. Robinson’s most recent blasphemous parody of a marriage could not have involved God in any way. May both of them repent and become Christian.

Allen Lewis
May 4, 2014

This is very sad. What is really sad about it is that the Episcopal Church (US) has destroyed itself over such a fickle, publicity hound as Gene Robinson.

I will stop now because I don’t want to start gloating. But Gene is such a Drama Queen that you just knew this would have to happen, sooner or later.

unreconstructed rebel
May 4, 2014

If you look most of the current breed of episcopal clergy, especially the wimmen, all are about self-actualization & not about serving the Kingdom, much less answering a call from Something greater than one’s self.

wm Paul
May 4, 2014

A surprise? Not really. And remember how very shortly after his consecration it emerged that–surprise–there was an alcohol problem. I have sympathy for anyone with that condition, truly, but the vetting process had to have turned a blind eye to that in some measure in their haste to do a so-called “progressive” thing. And it’s not unreasonable to hold VGR responsible for the supression of this, notwithstanding the denial-inducing aspects of alcoholism.

I don’t know all the differences between self-interest, selfishness, and narcissism, nor the dynamics that intensify each. But VGR sure seems to have taken the train to the end stop on that route. Just sayin’ what I see.

Paula Loughlin
May 4, 2014

I am gonna guess this will not bring about a period of repentance and reflection but will bring about a book tour.

La sigh.

Fuinseoig
May 4, 2014

Well, if nobody ever knew anything about homosexuality and homosexuals until the 19th/20th centuries, then the activists have to stop claiming “Leonardo was gay, Michelangelo was gay, Shakespeare was gay, Lincoln was gay, Cultural Hero Of Your Choice was gay.”

You can’t eat your cake and have it: either back then, there really were real homosexuals and people knew it, or the admired figures of the past you want to claim on your side weren’t really gay. Which is it?

FW Ken
May 4, 2014

I feel sorry for Gene and Mark. Being gay is a young man’s game, and they have next to no chance of finding new partners, unless they buy them. Which is what the older gay men I know do to stave off the lonliness. Sometimes they just pay for sex, sometimes move in young homeless guys, most of them drug addicts. It’s sad.

Marie Blocher
May 4, 2014

To Unreconstructed Rebel,
Robert Munday said it best:
“To be more precise, Episcopal seminary education has concentrated on preparing men and women for a career in the Episcopal Church (note my choice of words) but has been utterly incapable of equipping them for biblically-faithful, Gospel-centered, Spirit-empowered ministry.”

Fuinseoig
May 4, 2014

What I am not going to do is slam Bishop Robinson about his divorce. He’s not doing any worse than the rest of his married fellow-Americans. What I do want to strangle, every time I see it, is that “life-long faithful commitment” rubbish.

Cohabitation, divorce and remarriage are dead issues in the majority of Christian denominations. Nobody seriously expects that their pastor or bishop is going to tell them “Perhaps you may have a civil divorce if the cause is grave enough, but you are in a sacramental marriage and if you remarry, you are an adulterer”. Stop trying to convince we, the knuckle-dragging Neanderthal homophobes, that you are genuinely going to hold gay and lesbian people to a higher standard on this than you are your straight parishioners, or that you are going to tell your straight parishioners that they’re only supposed to use contraception to limit their families within marriage (and that one or two children is not the limit).

When it comes to fidelity and commitment within marriage, we heterosexuals are living in glass houses and can’t throw any stones at the gays.

I had occasion to dig up U.S. marriage statistics for another discussion online elsewhere, and the 2009 figures show that Bishop Robinson is perfectly within American averages for a relationship breaking up after 25 years/a marriage after 8 years (however you want to measure how long he and his partner were together). (Bolding within the following excerpts mine).

Marital Characteristics of Selected Group Quarters Populations and the Population in Households: 2009-2011

Number of Times Married (% of Households)
Once 75.3
Twice 19.5
Three or more times 5.2

12% of men and women had married twice, while 3% had married three or more times. The proportion of men and women married twice was about 20% or higher for men and women aged 50 to 69.

Number, Timing, and Duration of Marriages and Divorces: 2009 Household Economic Studies

Duration of Terminated Marriages and Median Time to Remarriage Following Divorce

How long do marriages last and how quickly do people remarry?
Table 8, profiling the marital experience of the population as of 2009, shows that first marriages which ended in divorce lasted a median of 8 years for men and women overall.

Table 8 also shows the median duration of time between the divorce from a first marriage and a second marriage. Half of the men and women in all of the race and Hispanic-origin groups who remarried after divorcing from their first marriage did so within about 4 years. The median duration of second marriages that ended in divorce did not differ from that for first marriages.

6% of all currently married couples involved a wife who was in her second marriage and a husband who was in his first marriage, while another 8% of all currently married couples involved a husband who was in his second marriage and a wife who was in her first marriage.

8% of currently married couples and couples married within the previous year involved spouses who were both in their second marriage. A very small percentage of all currently married couples (1%) consisted of a husband and wife who had both been married 3 or more times.

So Bishop Robinson’s second marriage lasted eight years? Hitting the U.S. median there, so.

Fuinseoig
May 4, 2014

And the reason I’m not putting marriage in “scare quotes” when talking about the civil ceremony Bishop Robinson and his partner engaged in, is that it’s just as legal and just as valid and just as committed as the rest of the population who wanted to register for inheritance and hospital visitation rights marry for love.

If I could get an online ministry “ordination” and tie the knot for two friends while in a balloon, underwater, or hanging out of a tree, and have it be a legally-recognised marriage, I am not going to swallow the camel of that and then strain out the gnat of refusing the same recognition to a legal ceremony in a registry office or courthouse officiated by a public servant between two persons of the same gender.

(When it comes to church blessings or wedding ceremonies, however, that’s a whole different kettle of fish, despite what the Dean of the National Cathedral may think).

Tonestaple
May 4, 2014

If you skipped the comments at the Daily Beast, go back and read them. There is the strangest creature there who seems to think he is the hall monitor.

sybil marshall
May 4, 2014

Ewww. On all counts. Had forgotten about the Divorce Ceremony. Maybe Oakwise and whatever her name is (can’t recall now) can co-officiate at the next one. At the Solstice, which is coming right up, you know. *Wedding season* as a concept is just so nuptianormative, don’t you also know?

William Tighe
May 4, 2014

“Once again, if you’ll swallow Pike and Spong, why strain at Righter and Robinson?”

“Not that it makes it right but Pike & Spong were seen as anomalies at first. Of course Jim Pike was easy to dismiss when he ended it all before becoming the Perpetual Heresy Machine that Spong is.”

Don’t forget William Montgomery Brown (1855-1937), quondam PECUSA Bishop of Arkansas, who became a Communist and effectively an atheist, and who, even after his heresy trial (the last such PECUSA event, which was extensively reported in, as well as mocked by, the New York Times) became a “perpetual heresy machine.” Brown was to Pike as Pike was to Spong.

Muerk
May 4, 2014

What gets my goat is the whole sanctimonious feel of it. I mean Robinson touted his sexual partner as his One True Love of decades, and it was only fair that he should marry his One True Love just like a man and a woman could. How could we cruel Christians deny him his One True Love? How could we not affirm them in their Love?

However we should have known his commitment for better or for worse until death do us part was a limited deal after the first divorce. I’m just so disappointed that the Anglican Communion was torn apart for what? A guy who can’t make a marriage work, gay or straight. What a waste. The Devil must be laughing at this.

midwestnorwegian
May 4, 2014

What’s the prevailing “wisdom” over at Naughton’s joint over this “revelation”?

Marie Blocher
May 4, 2014

If I recall correctly, the convention gave in to confirming his election because the people of the Dio of New Hampshire wanted Gene as their bishop. Much to do about letting the locals decide…
I can’t help wondering if the people of New Hampshire realized they had been used when, as their bishop he spent so little time in the state, what with book tours, campaigning for admittance to the Lambeth thing, and other GLBT events, etc.
Now for an encore, he is divorcing his One True Love(Patent Pending). For what? The only acceptable excuse
would be to repent and return to his wife, if she’d have him back.
And still no offers from Hollywood! Can’t they recognize his greatness, his star quality?

The young fogey
May 4, 2014

The best way to handle someone like Bishop Robinson is to ignore him. The mainline’s a joke; in other news, the sun rises in the east. In still more news, note how after his consecration, hordes of homosexuals and liberal Catholics flocked to the Episcopal Church. Oh, wait.

FW Ken
May 4, 2014

In truth, is fair to point out that Bp. Robinson does not represent a watershed in the numerical decline of the Episcopal Church. Theological decline, arguably, but both his diocese and the domestic dioceses continued the slide they had been on since the mid-70s. The rate has increased, but it’s been doing that all along.

Mark
May 4, 2014

I think it’s fair to say there is some material difference between tolerating a bishop remaining in office after he starts professing heresy, vs. consecrating someone who is already flagrantly flouting tradition. The former is a plenty big deal but the latter is significantly different.

For me personally Spong was the cue to seek the exits, while Righter and Robinson were mere footnotes, but those who come at the eleventh hour are rewarded like those who come at the first, and all that.

Christopher Johnson
May 4, 2014

I totally agree, Ken. Robbie was only a symptom, he was never the disease.

Katherine
May 4, 2014

midwestnorwegian, I went to Naughton’s café where the item was posted. There were NO comments. Too embarrassing for them, I suppose.

Elaine S.
May 4, 2014

As for Fuinseoig’s reference to Dante’s Inferno, the poet set aside an entire circle of hell for people who committed what he termed violence against God, nature and Art — blasphemers, sodomites and usurers, respectively. Blasphemy is pretty self-explanatory; sodomy as “violence against nature” is, um, pretty much self-explanatory as well; but what’s the problem with usury, i.e. making money by charging interest on loans? Well, it was considered a crime against “art” — the principle that man was supposed to make his living by honest work and by using the things of nature to do good — because usurers didn’t earn a living actually DOING anything, they just used money to make more money, which Dante considered just as unnatural and sterile as sodomy. If Dante were around today, that particular circle of the Inferno would be due for a major expansion, I suppose.

Ad Orientem
May 4, 2014

+1 to what The young fogey said.

Kc
May 4, 2014

His divorce from his wife should have disqualified him as a bishop..not to mention his ego

Bill (not IB)
May 5, 2014

FW Ken,

Robinson *does* represent a watershed in the Christian church.

Think of all the tears being shed in heaven over the heretical, ungodly effects of Robinson’s actions. His unique position as “first” gay bishop, and then “first divorced” gay bishop quite clearly result in wailing and gnashing of teeth amongst the orthodox faithful.

Where are the TEC PR people now, who should be proclaiming that homosexual marriage is as unconstrained from divorce as straight marriage? When will they tell us about how fairness has come a full 360 degrees, and now anyone who wants to be married can do so and be assured of obtaining a divorce with equal ease?

Mene, mene, tekel.

Don Janousek
May 5, 2014

We could play “Take a drink” whenever anyone points out an heretical statement is made by the fool Spong, but we would all be drunk within five minutes.

Robinson is a really special type of non-Christian heretic/apostate/sodomite. Perhaps he will do another “switcheroo” and remarry his ex (female) wife. Of course, if Robbie was, as I assume, the “wife” in his homo “marriage,” then remarrying his ex (female) wife would be a same-sex marriage, but…he would support that anyway. Sorta a cloud with a silver lining to sodomites around the world.

We are having another sunny day here in Constantinople and the Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kyrill has not announced his engagement to the Monk Feodor, so things are good.

BTW – Isn’t Robbie also an alcoholic? I have been in AA for 24 years now, so I am not insulting alcoholics, but wouldn’t a lot of cheap gin have destroyed many of his limited supply of brain cells over the years?” Like Clive Bundy said, I am just “wondering.”

midwestnorwegian
May 5, 2014

Don – I’m convinced he has fewer soul cells remaining from the booze – than brain cells.

Katherine
May 5, 2014

Robinson’s wife remarried quite soon after the divorce.

While there’s life there’s hope. As Gregg the obscure said above, maybe he and his soon-to-be-ex “husband” will repent and become Christians.

Daniel aka Fisherman
May 5, 2014

The Life of Vicki Gene -

Chapter 1: Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me.

Chapter 2: Yay is Me. Yay is Me. Yay is Me. Yay is Me. Yay is Me. Yay is Me. Yay is Me. Yay is Me.

Chapter 3: Woe is Me. Woe is Me. Woe is Me. Woe is Me. Woe is Me. Woe is Me. Woe is Me. Woe is Me.

Chapter 4: to be continued

TEC has been destroyed as a Christian institution and alienated from the majority of Anglicans on this Earth in the name of Narcissism, heresy and the celebration of sinful behavior.

Dave
May 5, 2014

“Now he has become the first bishop ever to have divorced someone of each gender.”

Perhaps he can find a transsexual and make it 3 for 3.

Jacob Morgan
May 5, 2014

Sure, Robinson was not the first Bishop to engage in homosexual or other equally scandalous behavior. But he may have been a first in that he was a bishop who, in regards to his immoral behavior, went to great lengths to preach what he practiced. Before then the Bishops, and even the bad Popes, either did not practice what they preached or did not preach at all. It is one thing to fail to live up to what they should have been teaching, it is very much another thing to be a missionary for immorality.

Fuinseoig
May 5, 2014

Don, please ease up on comments about who did what within the sexual relations. That doesn’t help when discussing why an active same-sex life is against the revelation of God and only adds fuel to the cries of “homophobia”. (Besides which, the current craze for heterosexual sodomy – anal sex with females – which is directly derived from porn and which magazines such as “Cosmopolitan” are doing their darnedest to normalise is something we should be lambasting for straights without pointing our fingers at gays).

Bishop Robinson left behind his wife and daughters; he has now separated from his partner of twenty-five years. All he has to face into, since it’s highly unlikely he’ll find another committed partner, is an old age on his own.

If he were to return to orthodox Christianity, I’d be delighted. What angers me is his boasting about being “the first gay bishop” as if, indeed, this was anything to be proud of and as if it hasn’t done immense damage to his own denomination and to the family of churches to which it belongs (in name, at least).

But perhaps that is all he has left – pride and stubbornness. May God break all our hearts of stone and bring us all to true repentance!

BobF
May 5, 2014

His only divorce was from his wife. In this case, he did not get a divorce, since it wasn’t a marriage in the first place.

He merely ceased using “Mark” as a prop to commit perverted sexual acts. He is no more divorced than someone who switches from one porno site to another got a “divorce” from the first site.

undergroundpewster
May 5, 2014

As this divorce was rumored to be in the works during his active employment as a bishop and is only now going public after his retirement, it puts the lie to any talk whatsoever of lifelong committed monogamous relationship that may have come out of his mouth for the past couple of years.

SouthCoast
May 5, 2014

“his unique position as “first” gay bishop, and then “first divorced” gay bishop quite clearly result in wailing and gnashing of teeth amongst the orthodox faithful.” Don’t know about the wailing and gnashing of teeth. (And it’s not particularly apt from its original context, IMHO.) But, were I still Episcopalian, I would not be wailing and gnashing: I would be deeply regretting that, as a lady, I was never taught properly how to spit.

FW Ken
May 5, 2014

Bill,

I was only talking about numbers. New Hampshire was declining at about 2%/annum before Robinson, and continued at that rate under his episcopate, with one blip caused by one large parish leaving. The interesting question is why they didn’t leave under his predecessor, for whom Robinson served as Canon to the Ordinary. But never mind that.

The rate of decline is similar for the entire Episcopal Church, at least the domestic dioceses. The decline began in the 70s at about half a percent per year, then rose to 1% in the 80s, 1.5% in the 90s, 2% in the oughts, and is now about 2.5%. It’s been awhile since I looked at this, but if memory serves, even the diocesan leavings didn’t affect the overall rates much. That was, however, before South Carolina left. That may have been a bump.

Church numbers fascinate me. Can you tell? :-)

Whitestone
May 5, 2014

President Narcissist had Bishop Narcissist give the closing prayer at the White House Prayer Breakfast recently.

President Narcissist is another dedicated missionary for ‘the greatest cause ever,’ spending HUNDRED$ of MILLION$ TAXPAYER DOLLAR$ to promote and normalize dangerous behaviors to US public school children- behaviors that cause epidemic rates of all STDs, including the incurable 4H (HIV, HPV, Herpes, Hepatitis) and have created new untreatable strains of gono rrhea and many people dealing with multiple diseases, creating a syndemic situation, in which the interaction between multiple symptoms of multiple diseases worsens the prognosis, multiplies the misery and complicates and in some cases prevents treatment.

Ironically, it is among Obama’s sons and daughters (young African Americans practicing promiscuous hetero, homo and bi-se xuality) that the greatest increase and devastation is occurring.

gppp
May 5, 2014

Fuinseog — I think what Don was pointing to is that Vicky Gene appears to have been the submissive partner in the relationship, which is huge in that it suggests that the split from Mark is Vicky’s doing. It would explain why he waited to until retirement to do it.

It is totally congruent with the nature of most long-term (and virtually every short-term) homosexual relationships I have seen in that one partner is mostly or totally dominant over the other. The only unknown in such relationships is how long and to what degree the submissive partner is willing to be dominated. Once the limit is reached, the submissive partner has no choice to leave — I’ve seen more than a dozen homo couples in my former parish alone in the last fifteen years split this way — and it’s usually the submissive one having an easier time finding the next squeeze while the dominant one spends time rebuilding his reputation to make himself attractive again before finding his next victim.

I’ve also heard a number of older homos talk about how they need to recruit a play buddy to go along when they make plans to go somewhere on vacation. They’re almost always the dominant type, and quite frequently are abusive, too.

The very good point Ken makes is that homoism is very definitely a young man’s -ism, and what young man wants to hang with a guy, however receptive and attractive (beyond money), as over the hill as Vicky? His notoriety might help him attract someone, but otherwise he could well be very lonely in his older age.

But if the “submissive” assessment is correct, we’ll soon see Vicky begin to show the bodily ravages that homoism wreaks. I’ve seen it in too many to believe that it won’t happen to him. If there’s one thing he could be spared, that would be it.

Don Janousek
May 5, 2014

Fuinseoig
“Homophobia?” I’m not afraid of homos, nor do I give a tinker’s darn about any perverts who direct the “cries of homophobia” my way. (Not referring to you – I mean the LBGTQTXYZ crowd.)

Now when it gets to someone dangerous, like Hitllary Clinton, the I plead guilty to Hillaryphobia.

Dave – I really liked your comment. “First bishop to divorce members of both genders.” High Five! ‘Course, he wasn’t a real bishop and his second hook-up wasn’t a real marriage, but, hey, let’s make like liberals on this and ignore the facts.

Oh, and before anyone asks why he wasn’t a “real” bishop, see Pope Leo XIII on the invalidity of anglican orders.

FrMichael
May 6, 2014

The progressive TEC blogsphere is a figurative Hiroshima, August 7, 1945– all is silent in the aftermath of the A-bomb drop, the Robinson-Andrew “divorce.” The survivors move around like zombies, their world shattered by an undeniable blast of reality. Unfortunately for the TECsters, there is no Emperor Hirohito to call on them to endure the unendurable: biblical morality. TEC is doomed to the curses and laments of Revelations 17-18. –cross-posted to the Telling Secrets blog

LaVallette
May 6, 2014

“My name is Bishop Gene, the destroyer of Episcopalian/ Anglican orthodoxy! Reflect upon my life, ye believers, and despair”.

And Robinson’s Faustian agreement comes to term, and the only one laughing, as the only beneficiary, is the Prince of Liars.

Our obligation is to pray for Gene. that God may have mercy on Gene’s soul and come to his aid.

Zach Frey
May 6, 2014

Fuinseoig,

You can’t eat your cake and have it: either back then, there really were real homosexuals and people knew it, or the admired figures of the past you want to claim on your side weren’t really gay. Which is it?

It’s whichever one serves the need of the moment.

You expect them to be constrained by logic? Didn’t you get the memo? “Logic” and the Law of Non-Contradiction are patriarchal constructs, created by Dead White European Males, and therefore inherently anti-feminist and homophobic.

So there! Homophobe! Hater! Don’t tell me that I can’t have my cake and eat it too! You just don’t understaaand the loving, committed relationship I have with my cake!!

peace,
Zach

Dale Matson
May 6, 2014

Crickets still chirping on Episcopal Cafe blog.

The Little Myrmidon
May 6, 2014

So the bottom line here is that Robinson will now be twice divorced – both times at his instigation. What does that say about him?

Secondly, Re: gppp – in my, admittedly, limited experience with ga- ay male partnerships, I’ve noticed a pattern of disparity in the ages of the men. Quite often the difference is about 15 years. So it’s easy to infer that there’s a quid pro quo in these relationships such as access to the older man’s lifestyle, assets, business relationships, gifts conferred, doors opened, etc., etc. The younger man trades sex and his youth for material or career boosting benefits, while the older man gets to flaunt his arm candy.

What happens when the older man is not in a position to offer younger men these benefits, I don’t know, but by this time the younger men have become older and are probably cruisin’ for younger men themselves.

Yes, there’s usually a dominant partner and quite often abuse. Not only have I observed this personally, but there are statistics that support this.

In light of this observed behaviour, I’d say this undermines the whole concept of “loving, committed” relationships. Especially when compared to the overwhelming number of hetero relationships where the man & woman are the same or almost the same age and marry with the intention of living together to raise a family.

unreconstructed rebel
May 6, 2014

“Yes, there’s usually a dominant partner and quite often abuse. Not only have I observed this personally, but there are statistics that support this.”

Yup. What I often see is a rich queen & a poorer partner to do the cooking & dishes. When the queen gets bored & wants to move on, things turn ugly.

Michal
May 6, 2014

wm Paul gets it…it’s not a surprise…and only the lawyers are getting rich…

Daniel Muller
May 6, 2014

Coming next:laptop divorce?

wm Paul
May 7, 2014

This may be judged as piling on, but I will say that I also will not be surprised if VGR adds to his “life is hard” claim public criticism of our culture for not supporting married gays and gay marriage thereby blaming, at least in part, the culture and the church culture for the demise of his marriage. I just don’t expect him to leave the public stage. What evidence is there that he will? Ever? The demise of the relationahip will be, in (fairly short) time, a badge of martyrdom for VGR. (and some of this upcoming, and lamentable, stream of publicity that I predict–sexualpractices aside–i will lay at the feet of Phil Donohue, Oprah, Dr Phil and the cultural supporters of narcissism:))

Support The MCJ

Search

Links

Meta